The General Election

[Red Five]

 

 

 

Red, 270toWin is awesome. I've had some pretty good discussion lately about how a Clinton v. Trump election could change the electoral map. Trump seems to be under the delusion that he could win blue fortresses like PA or even NY. I can't tell if he really believes it or if it's just the bluster. He'll never win NY and I seriously doubt PA.

 

Anybody got any ideas on how the map could change? Personally, I'm of the mind Trump's complete lack of minority support could put AZ and GA in play to go blue, with high Hispanic and minority population around Atlanta booming. Trump's best shot to expand his map would be the Rust Belt, IMO, with his talk on trade deals. I could see it selling there.

 

Taking Trump/Hillary out of the picture, that map above outlines the Rs problem in winning no matter who the candidates are. The Rs are currently at a disadvantage in winning the presidency and need to do something to change that. What it is, I don't know. But I also don't think that Trump is the answer.

 

Looking at 2016, NY isn't in play. Period. Anyone who suggests otherwise is delusional. I guess PA could be in play, but I doubt it.

 

I don't know about GA, but I could totally see AZ going D just due to the changing demographics.

 

I wonder if the Clinton name could carry any states that Bill won in 92/96 but have been R since. Somewhere like Missouri where Obama was within 0.1% of winning in 08?

 

 

I highly doubt PA as well. From my understanding of the state, too much of the population is centered in Philly, and that's likely going to go Clinton by a wide enough margin that it outweighs Trump's efforts in the more rural parts of the state. Several Philly folks I've talked with on Reddit seem convinced that he has no shot.

 

I view GA and AZ as long shots, but you never know. I think Trump could open up states that a weak red leans like that. Demographics are huge. It sounds crazy now, but someday we'll talk about Texas as a purple state, if the Hispanic population continues growing there.

 

Not a Bill Clinton state, but I think Trump also puts North Carolina in play as well. Obama won it by the narrowest of margins (.32 points) in 2008 and lost it in 2012.

 

Does putting Newt on the ticket (like some have speculated) bring GA into the Trump camp or is Newt more of a negative within the state?

 

 

I don't know about GA, but I think putting Newt on the card would be a negative nationally. Yes, he can legislate, but he's another old white guy who has been married 3x.

[Danny Bateman]

Trump - Gingrich 2016: The Family Values ticket

 

I agree with RedFive, TGH. He might have statewide appeal in GA, I honestly know. Maybe he keeps that state red. And he fits the bill as a "political" type that Trump apparently wants at VP.

 

But I think he brings nothing demographically to the ticket, and he's probably only popular with registered Repubs. Wouldn't help much with independents. And they've already got the old white guy demo locked up.

 

It may still be his best available choice.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes looking at recent election styles can be a good predictor of the next election. This year, however, I think all the rules are thrown out the door. We are starting with 2 candidates who both have high negatives, one is a bully, and the other a pathological liar. The bully has a long history of "winning" and despite what some may feel about his personality, it's hard to argue that he's not been a successful businessman overall (I know he declared bankruptcy). The pathological liar has spent her entire life on the political scene preparing for this opportunity to become POTUS, and despite her many years in service, "successful" is not a word that would immediately come to mind. With all that said, here is how the 2016 map may look different than 2008 and 2012:

 

1. Florida is Trump turf given his ties to that state. Hillary is popular there too, but I see this as a flip.

 

2. Upper Midwest-This is the biggest region where you may see some states flip in Trump's favor. His messaging about blue collar workers getting screwed is similar to Bernie's message and plays well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Of those 4 states, Ohio is the most purple to begin with, and I would place odds on Trump winning Ohio. If he flips just one or two of the other states, its pretty much over.

 

3. A few other states are going to be very close, including New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

 

4. The question should be raised as to where can Hillary expand the elector map from what Obama got last time. Obama won North Carolina in 2008, and Romney won it in 2012. This is the ONLY state I could see Hillary flipping from 2012.

 

So here is my early prediction of the flips.

 

1. Trump picks up Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

 

2. Hillary doesn't pick up any new states but gets all the states Obama won minus those just mentioned that Trump flips.

 

Where does this put the final tally:

 

Trump at 279 electoral votes

 

Hillary at 259 electoral votes

 

Now what is interesting about this, if Hillary could flip North Carolina, she would win. Meanwhile, if everything predicted holds true, but Hillary holds Wisconsin, they are deadlocked at 269 each. How fitting would that be for an end to this crazy presidential cycle.

 

Oh one more thing. I am a mainstream Conservative and not a Trump fan, but he was able to take down the deepest and most talented and diverse pool of candidates to ever run on either side of the aisle, so this notion that he can't beat Hillary is ludicrous at this point. A new national poll just came out tonight and he's besting HIllary by 3 points.

 

 

A lot to comment on in here, but I will point out 2 things in red above

 

I don't think that Hillary has anything to worry about in MN, WI, or MI. I especially can't see a WI flip. It was one of the few states where Trump wasn't very competitive in the primary, losing by 13 points. And if Ryan doesn't get fully onboard with Trump, not sure WI follows suit. There aren't very many recent polls there (last one 4/20), but Hillary has lead by about 10 points in all of the ones in 2016.

 

As for the deepest, most talented, and most diverse pool of candidates... Well there were 15ish, so that's deep. And there was a woman, a African American, and a Latino, so I guess that's diverse. But most talented? I don't know about that. If those are the most talented candidates that we have, god save this county. I mean Ted Cruz by all accounts is the most hated man in the Senate and finished 2nd. We will agree to disagree there.

 

 

As for the 3 states you pointed out, I think Trump has the best chance in MI, then WI, then MN. I also do think Ryan will get on board, but the question will be whether Walker gets on board. Trump does not need any of those 3 states to win, but if he would win one of those 3, he would be on his way to an easy victory.

As for the most talented group, I'm sure that is dependent upon your political lens, but in terms of traditional primary races, we are talking about many very successful governors in their states that won reelection at least once if not more, including Jeb Bush, Christie, Scott Walker, Rick Perry, John Kasich, and you can throw the NY governor in there too even though he was not a major player in the race. In many primary seasons other years (let's say 1996 or 2008) any of these guys would have been front-runners and likely winners of the nomination in a smaller field like the Dems had this year. Add in some talented Senators (I agree Cruz is not likable), and a few outsiders who have been successful in their fields, and there you have a talented bench.

[HuskerNation1]

Trump - Gingrich 2016: The Family Values ticket

 

I agree with RedFive, TGH. He might have statewide appeal in GA, I honestly know. Maybe he keeps that state red. And he fits the bill as a "political" type that Trump apparently wants at VP.

 

But I think he brings nothing demographically to the ticket, and he's probably only popular with registered Repubs. Wouldn't help much with independents. And they've already got the old white guy demo locked up.

 

It may still be his best available choice.

 

Gingrich would add nothing to Trump's ticket. In all honestly Trump needs Kasich or Rubio both as a complement to his style/personality and for the states they represent. Rubio would be ideal as he's a foreign policy whiz and has a great personal story, but I understand why Rubio does not want to be tied to Trump.

[Omaha-Husker]

 

 

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes looking at recent election styles can be a good predictor of the next election. This year, however, I think all the rules are thrown out the door. We are starting with 2 candidates who both have high negatives, one is a bully, and the other a pathological liar. The bully has a long history of "winning" and despite what some may feel about his personality, it's hard to argue that he's not been a successful businessman overall (I know he declared bankruptcy). The pathological liar has spent her entire life on the political scene preparing for this opportunity to become POTUS, and despite her many years in service, "successful" is not a word that would immediately come to mind. With all that said, here is how the 2016 map may look different than 2008 and 2012:

 

1. Florida is Trump turf given his ties to that state. Hillary is popular there too, but I see this as a flip.

 

2. Upper Midwest-This is the biggest region where you may see some states flip in Trump's favor. His messaging about blue collar workers getting screwed is similar to Bernie's message and plays well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Of those 4 states, Ohio is the most purple to begin with, and I would place odds on Trump winning Ohio. If he flips just one or two of the other states, its pretty much over.

 

3. A few other states are going to be very close, including New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

 

4. The question should be raised as to where can Hillary expand the elector map from what Obama got last time. Obama won North Carolina in 2008, and Romney won it in 2012. This is the ONLY state I could see Hillary flipping from 2012.

 

So here is my early prediction of the flips.

 

1. Trump picks up Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

 

2. Hillary doesn't pick up any new states but gets all the states Obama won minus those just mentioned that Trump flips.

 

Where does this put the final tally:

 

Trump at 279 electoral votes

 

Hillary at 259 electoral votes

 

Now what is interesting about this, if Hillary could flip North Carolina, she would win. Meanwhile, if everything predicted holds true, but Hillary holds Wisconsin, they are deadlocked at 269 each. How fitting would that be for an end to this crazy presidential cycle.

 

Oh one more thing. I am a mainstream Conservative and not a Trump fan, but he was able to take down the deepest and most talented and diverse pool of candidates to ever run on either side of the aisle, so this notion that he can't beat Hillary is ludicrous at this point. A new national poll just came out tonight and he's besting HIllary by 3 points.

 

 

If that scenario played out Omaha could legitimately be the deciding vote if it went blue like it did in '08. That would be fascinating drama if nothing else.

[TGHusker]

Trump - Gingrich 2016: The Family Values ticket

 

I agree with RedFive, TGH. He might have statewide appeal in GA, I honestly know. Maybe he keeps that state red. And he fits the bill as a "political" type that Trump apparently wants at VP.

 

But I think he brings nothing demographically to the ticket, and he's probably only popular with registered Repubs. Wouldn't help much with independents. And they've already got the old white guy demo locked up.

 

It may still be his best available choice.

I think you and Red Five are right - Newt doesn't bring anything new to the ticket. He may be better as Chief of Staff or some other high cabinet post (although I think Crispy cream Christi and Ben Carson are aiming at that Chief of Staff position also). Trump needs a splash at VP who can hide some of his negatives. However, he may not get a splash candidate who is willing to be soiled by being associated wt Trump.

[HuskerNation1]

 

 

 

http://www.270towin.com/maps/clinton-trump-electoral-map

 

 

This site is great. It also illustrates Trump's (and any other R's) problem with getting elected. The below is a map of every state that has voted the same in the last 4 elections (since 2000). Assuming that doesn't change, Hillary has a huge head start and only needs 28 more votes to win. Basically Trump has to win Ohio and Florida to have any chance. And even then he has to flip some states that have been D over the last 2 elections (NV, CO, NM, IA, VA, NH) or PA which some think is in play, but hasn't gone R since 88.

 

 

 

 

Sometimes looking at recent election styles can be a good predictor of the next election. This year, however, I think all the rules are thrown out the door. We are starting with 2 candidates who both have high negatives, one is a bully, and the other a pathological liar. The bully has a long history of "winning" and despite what some may feel about his personality, it's hard to argue that he's not been a successful businessman overall (I know he declared bankruptcy). The pathological liar has spent her entire life on the political scene preparing for this opportunity to become POTUS, and despite her many years in service, "successful" is not a word that would immediately come to mind. With all that said, here is how the 2016 map may look different than 2008 and 2012:

 

1. Florida is Trump turf given his ties to that state. Hillary is popular there too, but I see this as a flip.

 

2. Upper Midwest-This is the biggest region where you may see some states flip in Trump's favor. His messaging about blue collar workers getting screwed is similar to Bernie's message and plays well in Ohio, Pennsylvania, Michigan, Iowa, Minnesota and Wisconsin. Of those 4 states, Ohio is the most purple to begin with, and I would place odds on Trump winning Ohio. If he flips just one or two of the other states, its pretty much over.

 

3. A few other states are going to be very close, including New Hampshire, Nevada, and Colorado.

 

4. The question should be raised as to where can Hillary expand the elector map from what Obama got last time. Obama won North Carolina in 2008, and Romney won it in 2012. This is the ONLY state I could see Hillary flipping from 2012.

 

So here is my early prediction of the flips.

 

1. Trump picks up Florida, Ohio, Iowa, Wisconsin, Nevada, and New Hampshire.

 

2. Hillary doesn't pick up any new states but gets all the states Obama won minus those just mentioned that Trump flips.

 

Where does this put the final tally:

 

Trump at 279 electoral votes

 

Hillary at 259 electoral votes

 

Now what is interesting about this, if Hillary could flip North Carolina, she would win. Meanwhile, if everything predicted holds true, but Hillary holds Wisconsin, they are deadlocked at 269 each. How fitting would that be for an end to this crazy presidential cycle.

 

Oh one more thing. I am a mainstream Conservative and not a Trump fan, but he was able to take down the deepest and most talented and diverse pool of candidates to ever run on either side of the aisle, so this notion that he can't beat Hillary is ludicrous at this point. A new national poll just came out tonight and he's besting HIllary by 3 points.

 

 

If that scenario played out Omaha could legitimately be the deciding vote if it went blue like it did in '08. That would be fascinating drama if nothing else.

 

 

Possibly, though I'm not a big fan of state's splitting up their vote.

 

In other news, it looks like Trump has overtaken Hillary in the real clear politics average of polls for the first time ever.

 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2016/president/us/general_election_trump_vs_clinton-5491.html

 

It's still within the margin of error, but it shows how quickly this race has changed compared to the polls just a couple months ago.

[teachercd]

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

[HuskerNation1]

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

 

My outlook on Trump's ability to beat Hillary has changed drastically the past 3 months. I never thought he had a chance, but I also didn't think he could take down Jeb, Rubio, Kasich, Christie, Walker, etc... Hillary is a very weak candidate, and while Democrats have had the get out the vote advantage the past 2 election cycles, she just doesn't excite her base. Trump may help excite the Democratic base just as Clinton does the GOP base, but I still think the enthusiasm factor favors the GOP. Then it comes down to Independents and crossover voters, and this is the voting bloc I see Trump winning handily. And while I think personalities will play a big role in Hillary vs Trump, I think the bigger role is insider vs outsider. This is the first time since Ross Perot was a major player in the general election that a candidate who has never run for election in the past is going to be on the ballot in November. Meanwhile, Hillary has been on the political scene for 40+ years.

[mrandyk]

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

[teachercd]

 

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

 

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

I don't, not even a little bit. Doubt is powerful. I also think that 3 terms with the same party is very tough historically speaking.

 

The weird thing with trump is that things that should hurt him, don't. I have never seen anything like it. I think that you are correct in what you said but the guy just seems to get stronger when he attacks people.

[Danny Bateman]

 

 

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

I don't, not even a little bit. Doubt is powerful. I also think that 3 terms with the same party is very tough historically speaking.

The weird thing with trump is that things that should hurt him, don't. I have never seen anything like it. I think that you are correct in what you said but the guy just seems to get stronger when he attacks people.

I don't think we've ever had (certainly in my lifetime) had a non-politician celebrity run for President. Ross Perot war political, but he wasn't a celebrity either,

 

A lot of Trump's support is a cult of personality combined with a distaste for current politicians. It's sad, but a lot of people think of him as the super rich, super successful businessman from Celebrity Apprentice. I think that's all the more they care to think it through,

 

I'm confident eventually the majority of people will realize he's a crooked. clueless a-hole we don't want representing our country.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

I don't, not even a little bit. Doubt is powerful. I also think that 3 terms with the same party is very tough historically speaking.

The weird thing with trump is that things that should hurt him, don't. I have never seen anything like it. I think that you are correct in what you said but the guy just seems to get stronger when he attacks people.

I don't think we've ever had (certainly in my lifetime) had a non-politician celebrity run for President. Ross Perot war political, but he wasn't a celebrity either,

A lot of Trump's support is a cult of personality combined with a distaste for current politicians. It's sad, but a lot of people think of him as the super rich, super successful businessman from Celebrity Apprentice. I think that's all the more they care to think it through,

I'm confident eventually the majority of people will realize he's a crooked. clueless a-hole we don't want representing our country.

What would you consider "a quality person to represent our country"?

[BigRedBuster]

 

 

 

 

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

I don't, not even a little bit. Doubt is powerful. I also think that 3 terms with the same party is very tough historically speaking.

The weird thing with trump is that things that should hurt him, don't. I have never seen anything like it. I think that you are correct in what you said but the guy just seems to get stronger when he attacks people.

I don't think we've ever had (certainly in my lifetime) had a non-politician celebrity run for President. Ross Perot war political, but he wasn't a celebrity either,

A lot of Trump's support is a cult of personality combined with a distaste for current politicians. It's sad, but a lot of people think of him as the super rich, super successful businessman from Celebrity Apprentice. I think that's all the more they care to think it through,

I'm confident eventually the majority of people will realize he's a crooked. clueless a-hole we don't want representing our country.

What would you consider "a quality person to represent our country"?

 

Someone who isn't an embarrassing jack ass.

[HuskerShark]

 

 

 

 

 

The debates will be where things change...he will make her look like a criminal and get her off her "notes"...that can be a disaster for some people. With that said I still think she wins wth ease...when I say she I am referring to Clinton. Even though we still have no proof if she is a women and no proof if trump is a man .

 

The people who want to believe Hillary committed a crime already do, I'm guessing Trump's attempts at painting her as a criminal only serve to hurt him.

I don't, not even a little bit. Doubt is powerful. I also think that 3 terms with the same party is very tough historically speaking.

The weird thing with trump is that things that should hurt him, don't. I have never seen anything like it. I think that you are correct in what you said but the guy just seems to get stronger when he attacks people.

I don't think we've ever had (certainly in my lifetime) had a non-politician celebrity run for President. Ross Perot war political, but he wasn't a celebrity either,

A lot of Trump's support is a cult of personality combined with a distaste for current politicians. It's sad, but a lot of people think of him as the super rich, super successful businessman from Celebrity Apprentice. I think that's all the more they care to think it through,

I'm confident eventually the majority of people will realize he's a crooked. clueless a-hole we don't want representing our country.

What would you consider "a quality person to represent our country"?

Someone who isn't an embarrassing jack ass.

Soooo... Like a person who preaches about the 1% making too much money but drives a sports car paid for by donors?

 

Or maybe someone who preaches about women not making enough in comparison to men doing the same job, but personally pays women on staff around 30% less than men?

 

Sorry, I have no problem with Trump saying what he wants to say. At least he is authentic, and most of the time he ends up being right.